Although that bon mot is still as clever as it has been for decades, I must most strongly disagree: I would say that the cartridge’s existence was “asked” for more than any of the other big four defensive autoloading pistol cartridges (9mm, 357 SIG, 40 S&W, and 45 ACP) ever were.

The 40 S&W was a direct outgrowth of the FBI’s specific request for a less powerful 10mm Auto load than what was available when they switched from the 9mm after the Miami debacle in 1986. Shortly after the 40’s introduction, writers for gun periodicals also described how more than one defensive firearms expert had opined that (paraphrasing to a degree) “a 1 centimeter [1cm = 10mm ≈ 0.40"] bullet loaded to 9mm velocities” would be an ideal defensive round. Those musings did not, of course, directly result in the 40’s development, but they were a question that was definitely asked by some very knowledgeable people.

Edited for clarity.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: sigfreund, November 22, 2016 08:10 AM

“Most men … can seldom accept the simplest and most obvious truth if it … would oblige them to admit the falsity of conclusions … which they have woven, thread by thread, into the fabrics of their lives.”— Leo Tolstoy

Originally posted by sigfreund:... “a 1 centimeter [1cm = 10mm ≈ 0.40"] bullet loaded to 9mm velocities” would be an ideal defensive round. Those musings did not, of course, directly result in the 40’s development, but they were a question that was definitely asked by some very knowledgeable people.

I was talking on the phone to a retired big-city cop some years back and came around to guns, asked him what his preference was for concealed carry. He replied, "anything that starts with a 4."

--------------------------Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats. -- H L Mencken

I always prefer reality when I can figure out what it is. -- JALLEN 10/18/18

Originally posted by sigfreund:... “a 1 centimeter [1cm = 10mm ≈ 0.40"] bullet loaded to 9mm velocities” would be an ideal defensive round. Those musings did not, of course, directly result in the 40’s development, but they were a question that was definitely asked by some very knowledgeable people.

I was talking on the phone to a retired big-city cop some years back and came around to guns, asked him what his preference was for concealed carry. He replied, "anything that starts with a 4."

.....and if you ask the generation before him, they would reply "anything that starts with .357". I'm a cop myself, but unfortunately many cops are not that savvy when it comes equipment selection.....so take those cliche one-liners with a grain of salt.

Almost all of the large city departments in the country like NYPD which employees around 40,000 commissioned officers have great success with 9mm. They have more shootings in one year that almost all of the federal agencies using .40S&W combined. If there was truly a problem, it would likely have been addressed a long time ago.

In the grand scheme of things, the FBI developed a testing standard in the lab and the .40S&W did better in those tests than the 9mm did 26yrs ago. The major failing of the old 9mm loads was that they had inconsistent penetration characteristics, and their fragile bullet construction caused them to break apart when impacting materials like auto windshields. Now days with more advanced bullet technology, the 9mm does about the same as the .40S&W in those same FBI tests. A big reason why the FBI went back to 9mm in 2012 since the 9mm has many other desirable attributes to it.

Handgun calibers suck in general. Like all service sized calibers, the .40S&W has had some great success, and some spectacular "WTF" failures. A good example would be the Officer Peter Soulis OIS where he fired multiple rounds of high velocity 165gr Win Ranger Talons from his Glock G22 into the center mass of Tim Palmer. Palmer was shot 22 times.....17 of those hits were in the bowling pin of his center of mass. After 11 of those bowling pin hits to his COM, Palmer was still able to run back to his vehicle put it in gear to drive away. 6 more hits to his torso ended the fight. http://lawofficer.com/archive/...ter-soulis-incident/

If you want to talk about .45acp, the Officer Keith Borders and Officer Timothy Gramins incidents also show that even the big and might .45acp has had some spectacular failures to stop a determined attacker quickly.

Looks like the wheel gun shooting old timers who have long been retired were right........shot placement is everything.

If I had to pick one handgun caliber as the best overall it would without a doubt be the 40 SW.

I am a huge fan and have many thousands of rounds of trigger time with the 40. I have loaded them down (180g@925fps), loaded them hot (180g@1160fps), 165g, 200g, even 135 if you really want them hot, though I'd prefer 357 SIG in the lighter bullet weights myself.

I live in NYC. The reason they stayed with 9mm was a combination of cost and politics. Effectiveness had nothing to do with it. The NYPD stayed with .38 revolvers long past when most other agences went to 9mm pistols, because of the negative press given perception of increased capacity/lethality of 9mm in the press. Changing to .40 would have caused the same issue. And lets not forget the cost issue in a 35-40,000 person department.

Also, unlike a lot of departments, most shooting incidents will involve multiple officers (rarely do you see an NYPD officer alone.) When the SHTF, they put A LOT of rounds in the air (which has had the effect of hitting bystanders on occasion.) So they may not need the enhanced effectiveness of the .40 as much as a force where a lone officer would be dealing with a situation.

This is a long way of saying that the NYPD is not typical of most LE agencies, even those in other big cities.

quote:

Originally posted by Fuego220:

quote:

Originally posted by newtoSig765:

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:... “a 1 centimeter [1cm = 10mm ≈ 0.40"] bullet loaded to 9mm velocities” would be an ideal defensive round. Those musings did not, of course, directly result in the 40’s development, but they were a question that was definitely asked by some very knowledgeable people.

I was talking on the phone to a retired big-city cop some years back and came around to guns, asked him what his preference was for concealed carry. He replied, "anything that starts with a 4."

.....and if you ask the generation before him, they would reply "anything that starts with .357". I'm a cop myself, but unfortunately many cops are not that savvy when it comes equipment selection.....so take those cliche one-liners with a grain of salt.

Almost all of the large city departments in the country like NYPD which employees around 40,000 commissioned officers have great success with 9mm. They have more shootings in one year that almost all of the federal agencies using .40S&W combined. If there was truly a problem, it would likely have been addressed a long time ago.

In the grand scheme of things, the FBI developed a testing standard in the lab and the .40S&W did better in those tests than the 9mm did 26yrs ago. The major failing of the old 9mm loads was that they had inconsistent penetration characteristics, and their fragile bullet construction caused them to break apart when impacting materials like auto windshields. Now days with more advanced bullet technology, the 9mm does about the same as the .40S&W in those same FBI tests. A big reason why the FBI went back to 9mm in 2012 since the 9mm has many other desirable attributes to it.

Handgun calibers suck in general. Like all service sized calibers, the .40S&W has had some great success, and some spectacular "WTF" failures. A good example would be the Officer Peter Soulis OIS where he fired multiple rounds of high velocity 165gr Win Ranger Talons from his Glock G22 into the center mass of Tim Palmer. Palmer was shot 22 times.....17 of those hits were in the bowling pin of his center of mass. After 11 of those bowling pin hits to his COM, Palmer was still able to run back to his vehicle put it in gear to drive away. 6 more hits to his torso ended the fight. http://lawofficer.com/archive/...ter-soulis-incident/

If you want to talk about .45acp, the Officer Keith Borders and Officer Timothy Gramins incidents also show that even the big and might .45acp has had some spectacular failures to stop a determined attacker quickly.

Looks like the wheel gun shooting old timers who have long been retired were right........shot placement is everything.

This is an interesting thread. I freely admit that I have never owned a 40 handgun and I have been shooting and reloading pistols since 1977. When the 10mm came along, I thought it was a hell of a good round, but I didn’t really have to have one. In auto pistols I have always liked the 9mm and 45acp, got lots of cases and loaded ammo in those calibers. When the 40 came out, I just could not see any need to have one. In the plastic pistols like the Glock, I much prefer shooting the 9mm. Nothing wrong with the 40 at all, and if ammo gets as cheap as 9mm, I might have to get a 40 .

"But, as luck would have it, he stood up. He caught that chunk of lead." Gunnery Sergeant Carlos Hathcock

Your gun store probably stocks what he knows his customers will buy. When I look into my crystal ball I see a long running, steady market for the .40 S&W. With a plethora of new 9mm's being brought to market, they may seem to overshadow the .40 S&W's sitting behind the glass in the LGS but the round has its following.

I have a nice PPX 40. Damn thing is a joy to shoot. also its my only full black pistol. Everything else is either FDE or two tone. So yeah, your not alone. We just seem to enjoy being able to stop most threats quicker.

Originally posted by BBMW:I live in NYC. The reason they stayed with 9mm was a combination of cost and politics. Effectiveness had nothing to do with it. The NYPD stayed with .38 revolvers long past when most other agences went to 9mm pistols, because of the negative press given perception of increased capacity/lethality of 9mm in the press. Changing to .40 would have caused the same issue. And lets not forget the cost issue in a 35-40,000 person department.

Also, unlike a lot of departments, most shooting incidents will involve multiple officers (rarely do you see an NYPD officer alone.) When the SHTF, they put A LOT of rounds in the air (which has had the effect of hitting bystanders on occasion.) So they may not need the enhanced effectiveness of the .40 as much as a force where a lone officer would be dealing with a situation.

This is a long way of saying that the NYPD is not typical of most LE agencies, even those in other big cities.

Anyone familiar with the NYPD also knows, frankly, how bad they are with guns.

The departmental brass hates guns for political and philosophical reasons, and the rank and file are drawn from a population that has no familiarity with guns, has been taught to dislike and fear guns, and is subject to social sanction for admitting an interest in guns.

Then the officers, not gun people to begin with, are poorly trained. Can't have them learning to like guns after all.

This ineptitude has been known to kill - officers, bystanders, and others.

You really don't want to use NYPD as an example of anything other than what *not* to do.

Although that bon mot is still as clever as it has been for decades, I must most strongly disagree: I would say that the cartridge’s existence was “asked” for more than any of the other big four defensive autoloading pistol cartridges (9mm, 357 SIG, 40 S&W, and 45 ACP) ever were.

The 40 S&W was a direct outgrowth of the FBI’s specific request for a less powerful 10mm Auto load than what was available when they switched from the 9mm after the Miami debacle in 1986. Shortly after the 40’s introduction, writers for gun periodicals also described how more than one defensive firearms expert had opined that (paraphrasing to a degree) “a 1 centimeter [1cm = 10mm ≈ 0.40"] bullet loaded to 9mm velocities” would be an ideal defensive round. Those musings did not, of course, directly result in the 40’s development, but they were a question that was definitely asked by some very knowledgeable people.

Edited for clarity.

Hasn't the idea of a .40/1cm round in a certain weight and velocity range as an ideal tool for law enforcement been kicking around for a *long* time?

That idea kept coming back. Was a major driver behind several imperfect implementations, .41mag and 10mm both. Wasn't until .40sw came along that someone finally properly scratched that itch.

Although that bon mot is still as clever as it has been for decades, I must most strongly disagree: I would say that the cartridge’s existence was “asked” for more than any of the other big four defensive autoloading pistol cartridges (9mm, 357 SIG, 40 S&W, and 45 ACP) ever were.

The 40 S&W was a direct outgrowth of the FBI’s specific request for a less powerful 10mm Auto load than what was available when they switched from the 9mm after the Miami debacle in 1986. Shortly after the 40’s introduction, writers for gun periodicals also described how more than one defensive firearms expert had opined that (paraphrasing to a degree) “a 1 centimeter [1cm = 10mm ≈ 0.40"] bullet loaded to 9mm velocities” would be an ideal defensive round. Those musings did not, of course, directly result in the 40’s development, but they were a question that was definitely asked by some very knowledgeable people.

Edited for clarity.

Hasn't the idea of a .40/1cm round in a certain weight and velocity range as an ideal tool for law enforcement been kicking around for a *long* time?

That idea kept coming back. Was a major driver behind several imperfect implementations, .41mag and 10mm both. Wasn't until .40sw came along that someone finally properly scratched that itch.

I was kinda thinking that the .41 AE was a better round than the .40 S&W. But then again, you can't find any around here. Asking about the .41 AE mostly gets the reply of... Who?

My other Sig is a Steyr...

Posts: 3589 | Location: Somewhere looking for ammo that nobody has at a place I haven't been to for a pistol I couldn't live without... | Registered: December 02, 2014

Originally posted by sigfreund:I must most strongly disagree: I would say that the cartridge’s existence was “asked” for more than any of the other big four defensive autoloading pistol cartridges (9mm, 357 SIG, 40 S&W, and 45 ACP) ever were.

The 40 S&W was a direct outgrowth of the FBI’s specific request for a less powerful 10mm Auto load than what was available when they switched from the 9mm after the Miami debacle in 1986.

Indeed.

Back when I was deciding on my first auto-loader I read up on all the cartridges that were available at the time. (The .357 SIG wasn't out, yet.) To my way of thinking the .40 S&W came as close to my beloved .357 Magnum as was commonly, reasonably available at the time. (Now I suppose the .357 SIG would be that round, but, that would be comparatively much more expensive to shoot.)

I more regularly shoot and carry 9mm, these days, for a variety of reasons, but, I will be staying in practice with my .40 S&W hardware and I will stay stocked-up on ammo for it. If I was obliged to make a choice between the two: I would choose .40 S&W, for the same reasons I chose it originally.

quote:

Originally posted by .38supersig:I was kinda thinking that the .41 AE was a better round than the .40 S&W. But then again, you can't find any around here. Asking about the .41 AE mostly gets the reply of... Who?

I'd switch to .357 SIG in a New York heartbeat if it wasn't so bloody expensive to shoot.

"America is at that awkward stage. It's too late to work within the system,,,, but too early to shoot the bastards." -- Claire Wolfe"Whenever somebody uses 'liberal,' when what they really mean is 'leftist,' they immediately lose my attention." -- Me

You're not the last. I was late getting into the 40 game, I stayed with 9mm & 45ACP for a long time. The Gen4 g22 was the first 40 I could shoot fast AND accurate. I used to bash both glocks and 40SW.I now own a G22, G23, G27 and a G20 with a 40 conversion barrel.

I wouldn't say I'm a .40 holdout, since 9mm has been my go to since I got into firearms in 2003, but I have a Glock 22, and don't see getting rid of it. It's very shootable, not really a huge difference between it and my 17. Good standy pistol with a few mags, a holster, and a hundred rounds or so.

There seems to be a 9mm rennaissance right now. .40 had its heyday, .45 was king for a long time, and something else will be the new thing.

I have noticed a trend where "metal" framed, da/sa guns, in any caliber, and anything of any action not 9, are cause for scrutiny and casual contempt by self-avowed striker fired/9mm zealots. I personally think it's a narrow form of thinking, and shows a lack of depth in skillset and mentality as a pistol fighter.

I use both 9mm and striker fired guns as my go to (Glock), but I can't for the life of me figure out why anyone would care if I didn't use those. I also happen to have a thing for traditonal da/sa in steel and aluminum, and I'll always have a 226 9mm ready to go.

I think .40 will be around as a common caliber for as long as 9mm. The real question is who uses .45 GAP?